Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41494798›Full record

ArticleFamily medicine and community health2026

Australian General Practitioners' perspectives, experiences and use of non-drug interventions in primary care: a qualitative study.

Alexandra R Davidson, Hannah Greenwood, Isabella Maugeri, Caroline Katherine Dowsett, Loai Albarqouni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Family medicine and community health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Alexandra R DavidsonInstitute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia adavidso@bond.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-0445-3299
Hannah GreenwoodInstitute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5127-4667
Isabella MaugeriBond University Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0172-9103
Caroline Katherine DowsettInstitute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7734-9436
Loai AlbarqouniInstitute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4114-9106

Funding

INSTITUTIONAL TRAINING GRANT IN GENOMIC SCIENCET32HG000045 · NHGRI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI MICHAEL R BRENT, Barak A Cohen · 1997 to 2026
$8.4M
GENOMIC ANALYSES OF DROSOPHILA DEVELOPMENTK22HG000045 · NHGRI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI WHITE, KEVIN P · 2000 to 2004
$1.3M
NHGRI NIH HHS K22 HG000045NHGRI NIH HHS T32 HG000045
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveNon-drug interventions (NDIs) are underused in primary care, despite established effectiveness, safety, cost-benefit and guidelines. Existing research exploring barriers and enablers to NDI use primarily focuses on patients' perspectives, leaving general practitioners' (GPs') perspectives underexplored, despite their critical role in NDI delivery. The objective of this study is to explore Australian GPs' experiences and perspectives on the use of NDIs in primary care.

designAn interview study informed by realist methodology. Transcripts were abductively analysed, with a sample analysed by two researchers, using the Theoretical Domains Framework, which allows identification of individual and contextual factors that influence behaviour, and discussed in team meetings to develop themes.

settingInterviews took place either in person or online via Zoom, were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. PARTICIPANT: A convenience sample of GPs working in Australian primary care.

result14 GPs were interviewed for an average of 59 min. Four themes were developed representing the latent mechanisms underlying GPs' prescription and use of NDIs. (1) Obtaining and sharing knowledge: GPs' learning about NDIs is limited through medical school and continuing education, highlighting gaps in tertiary and specialty training. Sharing knowledge occurs bidirectionally. GPs share their learnt knowledge about NDIs with patients, who in turn share their lived experience knowledge. (2) Considering the patient: patient characteristics, circumstances and actual or perceived expectations influenced GPs' NDI prescription. Influences included financial status, therapeutic relationship, patient motivation, presenting condition and medication expectation. (3) Influence of primary care environment: time constraints, billing and policies influenced when and how GPs used and prescribed NDIs. Interprofessional collaboration and distributing patient resources were strategies used by GPs to overcome barriers. (4) NDIs part of GPs' role and identity: NDIs were prescribed as first-line treatments, preventative strategies or as an adjuvant to medication for both acute or chronic conditions, highlighting NDIs as core to GPs' role and care.

conclusionThis study reveals the interplay of factors and mechanisms influencing Australian GPs' use of NDIs, including systemic, educational and interpersonal dynamics. To optimise the integration of NDIs in primary care, prioritised training, clearer guidance and better access to evidence-based resources are required.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelGeneral PractitionersPractice Patterns, Physicians'Primary Health CareAdultAustraliaFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchGeneral PracticeHealth Services ResearchPhysicians, Primary CarePrimary Health CareQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID41494798
PMCPMC12778305

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.